Riccardo Federico Visconti graduated in Dentistry and Dental Prosthetics at Vita-Salute San Raffaele University (UniSR) and trained in implantology. A decade later, his multicentre randomised clinical trial was selected as a finalist for the best scientific contribution at the Academy of Osseointegration, one of the most important international congresses in the field, held in Washington DC.
Getting there required more than a strong study. Before travelling to Washington, Visconti had already cleared a competitive filter: an international travel grant, awarded to researchers to cover the costs of participating in scientific congresses where they present their work to the academic community. To obtain one, applicants submit an abstract summarising their research (initial question, methods, results), assessed by a committee on methodological quality, clinical relevance and originality. Visconti was one of only 40 recipients worldwide, and the only European among them.
At the start of his degree, Visconti’s priorities were straightforward. «My perspective was mainly clinical: studying, applying what I learned, improving my technical skills,» he recalls. The goal was to become a dentist capable of placing dental implants and handling complex rehabilitations. But dentistry is not only technique. Behind a single dental implant there may be a decade of research, a multicentre study, questions that are still open.
Training at UniSR gradually shifted that perspective. The focus moved beyond the procedure itself toward understanding the reasons behind every clinical choice. Practice and evidence stopped being separate concerns: every decision at the chair had to be traceable back to data. When those data were missing, the questions began. «If the evidence isn’t there, it’s worth asking the right questions to find it,» Visconti explains.
The project started from a precise clinical question: what is the optimal insertion depth for a dental implant to ensure stability and good clinical and aesthetic outcomes over the long term?
Under the supervision of Prof. Marco Esposito, associate professor of odontostomatological diseases at UniSR, Visconti took part in a clinical study involving 60 patients across six research centres. Each case compared two approaches: implant placement at 0.5 mm and at 1.5 mm below the bone crest (the upper margin of the cavity in which the implant is positioned).
Patients were followed for ten years, with standard implantology parameters assessed throughout: implant and prosthesis survival rates, biological and mechanical complications, stability of peri-implant bone, and aesthetic outcomes. The results showed no clinically significant differences between the two insertion depths: both approaches proved effective over the long term.
«This kind of evidence has a direct impact on daily clinical work» Visconti notes, «because it allows clinicians to make more informed and flexible decisions, based on long-term data rather than personal habits or preferences»
Scientific output in implantology is large and growing. For researchers, being able to distinguish between studies of varying rigour, correctly interpret data and apply findings to clinical practice is an essential skill. But before evaluating studies, there is an earlier question: which research questions are worth asking. Not all scientific problems carry the same clinical weight, and identifying those that genuinely matter is one of the least obvious, and most decisive, competencies in research training.
At the level of daily clinical work, it means questioning what looks settled: checking what level of evidence actually supports a protocol before applying it. «In this sense, what makes the difference is the ability to structure thinking in a critical and systematic way» Visconti observes. It is a skill built through practice, starting from the early years of training.
«Mine is a ‘hybrid’ path, where research doesn’t replace clinical practice but completes it and makes it more conscious. It changes the way you think: using research to inform practice and, at the same time, using practice to generate new research questions».
One of the factors that brought him to a finalist position at an international competition was an attitude developed during his years at UniSR: a willingness to engage actively in university life, to seek out dialogue with peers, researchers and lecturers, and an openness to the opportunities that the environment (between the Dental School, the hospital clinics and the research laboratories) consistently offered. In that process, UniSR Rector Prof. Enrico Gherlone was a key reference point, including for his approach to the relationship between clinical work and research.
«I didn’t know how much that disposition would expose me to opportunities that would change the direction of my career» Visconti recalls. «But I believe it was precisely that kind of involvement that allowed me to engage with large-scale research projects and international settings, all the way to the travel grant for Washington, where I presented my results as a finalist»
For those considering dentistry, Visconti’s path, from clinical training to ten years of dental implant research data presented in Washington, is a concrete example of what becomes possible when you stay open to the opportunities a research environment offers. «You need to actively seek out the most stimulating environments, engage with people who are more experienced, and approach every opportunity with an open mind,» he concludes.
Interested in research in dentistry?